Pages

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

Friday, 13 January 2017

There’s
as much to be written about the controversy surrounding No Man’s Sky as the game itself. But I’d prefer to focus on the game, so
I’ll try to keep this brief. No Man’s Sky promised the stars.
Crafted by a small team with big ambition, it was an indie title
marketed and priced as a triple A. The early previews were
misleadingly scripted, and many features – most notably the
possible inclusion of a multiplayer component – were not adequately
explained or demonstrated prior to release.

No
Man’s Sky rode a hype train like no other in recent memory. It was
a game fuelled not by fact but by dreams and expectations. And when
it finally released, and it failed to live up to those lofty
expectations, the backlash was equal to the hype. ‘No Man’s Lie’
was a common and popular phrase and – based on the preview videos
and interviews which were revealed to be a poor representation of the
final product – not an entirely inaccurate one.

Did
the developers intentionally seek to mislead? To lie? Or did they
make the mistake of confusing what they wanted for the title,
rather than what they could actually deliver? I don’t know. I
didn’t play No Man’s Sky at release. I didn’t ride the hype
train. But despite the negativity and controversy surrounding the
game, it was still one I wanted to experience for myself. Which is
why I picked it up at a 40% discount in the recent Steam sale.

This
isn’t a review of the release build. And it’s not a review of the
controversy. It’s a review of what I played. And what I played was
surprisingly … okay.

No
Man’s Sky is a space exploration game with elements of survival and
crafting. The ‘goal’ of the game is to reach the centre of a
procedurally generated galaxy. You begin on a randomly generated
world with a broken ship, a limited inventory and barely any
resources. Worlds will vary based on terrain, flora, fauna and
environment. And every world, due to the random generation, is
entirely unique – to a limited degree.

Some
worlds may be barren and lifeless, whilst others will be rich with
water, resources, plants and animal life. Some worlds may present
environmental hazards such as extreme heat, cold or radiation, and traversing such worlds will be dangerous without the appropriate
protection.

As
you explore these worlds you’ll gather resources through the use of
your multi-tool which serves not only as a tool for mining, but also
for combat. These resources will be used to repair or refuel your
ship, for trade to earn units (currency), to craft items or create
various upgrades for your equipment.

These
upgrades include improvements to weapon damage (multi-tool and ship),
shield strength, hazardous environmental protection, mining
efficiency and ship hyperdrive range. You’ll discover the
blueprints for these upgrades as you explore or interact with various
aliens throughout the game, although which blueprints you gain, like
many elements of the game, will be entirely random.

You
can buy new ships or locate and repair crashed ones. Ships will vary
based on appearance and inventory size, but there’s no variation in
terms of function or handling. There’s a ‘galactic’ marketplace
for trade, allowing you to buy or sell resources, although every star
system has a ‘local’ market, rather than a true galactic economy.
You can also trade with other alien explorers by interacting with
their ships.

There’s
a fairly decent base building system in the game, allowing you to
establish and expand your own personal outpost. You can recruit
aliens to serve in various positions which unlock missions, new
upgrades or base pieces to craft. This system wasn’t present in the
game at release, and it’s important to note that it’s a big part
of why I enjoyed playing No Man’s Sky in its current state.

There
are three main ways to play No Man’s Sky. You can explore at
random, with no set goal, although this isn’t something I’d
recommend. You can follow the most direct path to the centre of the
galaxy, although this too, isn’t something I’d recommend. And
finally, you can choose to follow the ‘Atlas Path’ which is the
closest thing No Man’s Sky has to a story, and it’s really where
you want to focus your attention.

The
early stages of the game serves not only as a tutorial, but to set
you upon the Atlas Path. It involves travelling to giant, ancient
space stations and collecting Atlas Stones. Once you have 10 stones,
you’ll travel to a final station for your ‘reward’. I’ll talk
more about that later, but the reason I recommend following the Atlas
Path is because it gives you a structured and clear series of
objectives.

This
is also why I enjoyed the base building system so much. It presents
you with clear objectives which give purpose to your exploration and
resource collection. Direction in a game like No Man’s Sky
is important. The ultimate goal may be to reach the galactic core,
but you need ‘micro-goals’ along the way to keep you motivated
and to feel that you’re achieving something.

The
Atlas Path and the base building system facilitate these micro-goals
but they can also be found within the upgrade system. Expanding your
inventory, improving your equipment or purchasing new ships are all
systems that serve to provide smaller, and more clearly obtainable
goals. None of them, it must be said, are entirely necessary to
progress, but without the desire to improve your equipment, acquire
new ships or expand your base, there’s very little purpose to your
exploration.

No
Man’s Sky is a game to play at your own pace. You can race from one
system to the next, or you can stop to explore every world. You can
scan plant and animal life and upload your discoveries for units. You
can also rename everything you discover – star systems, planets,
plants and animals. Although, for some strange reason, you can’t
rename your personal ship, which is the only thing I actually wanted
to rename.

Every
world has a sentinel force, and how aggressive these sentinels will
be is also random on every world. Some attack on sight, whilst others
remain completely passive unless you do something to piss them off
such as massacring the local wildlife, stealing stored resources or
breaking into secure locations.

Every
star system has a single space station for trade and fast travel to
your personal base. And every planet has various outposts and ruins.
These, aside from some visual variation, are identical on every
world. Ruins are the fastest way to learn new words from the alien
languages in the game, and learning these make interacting with the
three alien races a little easier.

You
can increase your ‘standing’ with these races, although there’s
little benefit to doing so. There’s also space combat in the game,
although like many pieces of the No Man’s Sky puzzle, it’s rather
basic and extremely limited.

‘Basic
and limited’ are the two best words to describe No Man’s Sky. The
galaxy may be massive, but the individual pieces are small. ‘Wide
as an ocean but shallow as a puddle’ is another popular phrase when
talking about the game. All of its pieces are serviceable, but they
lack the depth that would transform No Man’s Sky into a truly
impressive and engaging experience.

Every
planet may be unique, but due to the limited number of world building
assets, you won’t have to visit many worlds before you begin to see
the similarities. This also applies to plant and particularly to
animal life, which are randomly put together, once again, by a
limited set of assets. And whilst random generation can have its
advantages, and produce some rather cool looking planets, plants and
creatures, it can also generate rather hideous and awkward
monstrosities.

Some
worlds look fantastic. Others look like ass. The problem with
procedural generation, rather than hand crafted environments, is you
never know what you’re going to get. Which, I suppose you may
consider part of its appeal. But like I said, due to the limited
assets the game has to work with, it’s not long before you
recognise all the pieces no matter how poorly or appropriately the
game cobbles them together.

As
I’ve already mentioned, the ships in the game, aside from visual
appearance, all function and handle identically. The ‘galactic’
market is a very basic system, with no multi-system trade or economy.
There are only three alien races, and little variation in terms of
appearance for each race, and interacting with them is limited to
text and basic dialogue options.

Aliens
never depart their ships. They never even move. They’re all fixed
to a single spot and only animate if you move close enough. No Man’s
Sky doesn’t just feel small,
it feels lifeless.

Combat is also incredibly basic. It’s just a case of point and
shoot and recharge your shields when necessary. There’s a poor
selection of weapon types and also combat encounters – you’ll
either be defending yourself against the odd pirate, or defending a
freighter convoy.

But
like I said, all of these things are serviceable.
They work. And that’s the frustrating thing about No Man’s Sky.
The basics are there. The potential
is there. But it’s currently unfulfilled. I can’t help but
imagine what No Man’s Sky could have been with more depth to
combat, trade and exploration. But as I’m sure I’ve said before,
I try not to review what could or should have been, but rather what
we’ve got. No Man’s Sky may be disappointing in many aspects, but
that doesn’t mean I think it’s a bad game.

I played No Man’s Sky for nearly 60 hours so it must have done
something right. As basic as it all may be, the systems do the job.
Graphically, No Man’s Sky may be rather hit and miss, but when it
hits, it offers some truly stunning sights. The fact that I took over
70 screen shots whilst playing is testament to that. And as someone
who loves the idea of space exploration, being able to travel
seamlessly from surface to star is something I never grew tired of.

I enjoyed the base building component. Sure, it’s kind of pointless
but I liked doing it, even making sure my alien employees had their
own beds and personal space, even if they never moved from their
various work stations. Every so often I’d come across a world with
something I’d never seen before. It became increasingly rare as I
progressed, but No Man’s Sky could still surprise me on occasion,
even over 50 hours in.

I liked the style of the game, the ships and technology. Visiting
your first Atlas Station is a pretty cool moment, even if every
subsequent station looks pretty much the same. And following the
Atlas Path to see where it would lead, building my base and upgrading
my ship and equipment gave my progression an important sense of
purpose. It gave me a reason to press on, even when I’d seen nearly
everything the game had to offer in terms of its unfortunately
limited generation system.

And after nearly 60 hours of play, I can’t deny I enjoyed No Man’s
Sky for what it is – but I also can’t deny that I’m
disappointed by what it could have been.

So let’s talk about the ‘ending’ of No Man’s Sky. This is a
game, I think, that you really need to view as being more about the
journey, rather than the destination. Because the destination kind of
sucks. I won’t spoil it, but completing the Atlas Path doesn’t
really offer much in terms of a sense of achievement or
accomplishment, nor does reaching the centre of the galaxy – which
I didn’t actually do, for reasons I’ll explain.

After completing the Atlas Path, I gained the ability to locate black
holes on the galactic map. These supposedly offer a ‘short cut’
to the galactic centre. And after completing the Path, completing my
base and upgrading my ship and equipment to a degree I was happy
with, I was ready to make a direct run for the core. But when I
travelled through my first black hole, I moved only 1500 light years
closer to the centre.

I expected black holes to cut ten or even twenty thousand light years
every jump. But after travelling through more than 10, I realised
that on average I wasn’t gaining more than 2000 light years on
average. I calculated that it would take at least eighty black
hole jumps to be in touching distance of the centre – and every
time you jump through a black hole, a critical ship system is damaged
forcing you to continually repair.

This
wasn’t exactly ideal, so I decided to calculate how long it would
take using conventional hyperspace jumps. But even with an upgraded
hyperdrive, I estimated it would take a minimum
of five hundred jumps
to reach the centre. F**K THAT.

I may have been enjoying No Man’s Sky, but that was a tedious grind
I really didn’t need. Instead, I watched the ‘ending’ on
YouTube and trust me, I’m really glad I didn’t bother. But hey –
journey, not destination, right? Isn’t that what really matters?

There are lots of little design choices I could nitpick, and areas
that I think could be improved (no ring planets? No visual ship
upgrades? No surface map?) but this has already gone on too long, so
let’s start wrapping this up.

In terms of performance, No Man’s Sky is pretty rough. On all
medium settings I could maintain a fairly consistent 60FPS but it
would often drop as low as 30 depending on the environment. But even
on high settings, it’s hard to say No Man’s Sky is a particularly
great looking title. It can be, on occasion, if every piece of the
procedural generation clicks together in just the right way. When it
does, it’s pretty impressive. When it doesn’t, it’s pretty
f**king ugly. The soundtrack is consistently great though.

In
many ways, No Man’s Sky reminds me a lot of Fallout 4, which may
seem like an odd comparison, but hear me out. If you’ve read my
review of Fallout 4 you’ll know that overall, I enjoyed the
experience, but I felt it to be too shallow and limited to be truly
memorable or engaging. I sank countless hours into building my
settlements even though it was ultimately pointless. I enjoyed it in
a strangely relaxing and mindlessly repetitive kind of way.

And
that’s exactly how I enjoyed No Man’s Sky. It’s limited, basic,
shallow and sadly disappointing in many aspects. But it still
entertained me. I still had fun. I’m impressed more so by its
ambition than by the game itself, but the game, despite what I’ve
read online, really isn’t the worst.
It has its moments. It’s okay. I probably won’t play it again.

Wednesday, 11 January 2017

Saturday, 7 January 2017

A
small selection, but plenty to get stuck into. No Man’s Sky
is a title I’ve been following for some time, but sensibly decided
to wait for a discount. Is it truly the worst game ever? Spoiler:
It’s not! I’ve actually already played it and have a review
drafted. It’s the longest review I’ve written for some time. I
won’t spoil what score I gave it though.

Despite
Dishonored being one of my favourite games of the last few years, I
can’t say I was too excited about its sequel. It just didn’t feel
like a game that really needed a sequel. Like Dragon Age: Origins. I
didn’t really think that needed a sequel either and look how that
turned out.

But
hey, I can’t not at least give Dishonored 2 a shot.
Hopefully some of the patches have fixed its many reported release
issues. I’ll probably play this last, just to give a little more
time for further patches to fix anything that’s still broken.

INSIDE
is a title I’ve only heard positive things about. It’s from the
same developers of Limbo, which I thought was okay, but nothing
particularly special. I hope INSIDE is a step up. This was actually a gift from a friend, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to be nice about it.

And
finally we have Watch_Dogs 2. I’m probably one of only five
people in the world who liked Aidan Pearce, so I thought it was a
shame he wouldn’t be returning for the sequel. That said, I’m
totally open to a new setting, new characters and a new story. I
thought the original was pretty great, so I hope this is as good, if
not better.